Saturday, November 3, 2007
TO BLOGIT: Registering my desire to have .Dave reinstated also
I am new on this blog and have already gained considerable enjoyment and satisfaction from being involved. However I wish to add my voice to the appeal for .Dave's reinstatement into Blogit. The strength of my feelings on this matter are based on two factors:
1/ he was one of the first to welcome me and respond to my offerings when I joined, and consistently gave useful feedback and advice when I needed it
2/ it is clear that he is highly valued by many others for whom he has had a similar affect and, even in his absence, continues to inspire
It is extremely obvious that the community here has benefited greatly from .Dave's generous and warm spirit and it is my feeling that, until Blogit makes it clear how their decision comes from an equally well-meaning and considerate place, the lack of proper clarification or resolution will continue to leave many feeling dispirited and dismayed.
Do You Know?
Do any of you know how the "featured" post get to be in that particular place? I used to be there fairly often. In the last year I have not seen any one of my several blogs listed there once.
Do any of you know why the majority of the people on here get along? Do you know why there are about 10 bullies on here who use different tactics but they choose to use openly hateful language and they remain the favored?
If you could comment to me about this I would appreciate it.
KaeHae
They deleted some of my posts here as well! .... I thought that was very nice of them! ....
Waiting for an apology from Blogit and .Dave.'s re-instatement.
Hope you guys get to see this, before it's deleted.
Friday, November 2, 2007
Hmm, so there really IS censorship here
Brian76 posted a response from .Dave. and I posted a comment and surprise, surprise, both vanished after a short while. How long will this post remain? Keep your eyeballs peeled.
The odd thing is that blogit implied that the Town Square (not Community Help) was the place to discuss the .Dave. matter. But how can we discuss if blogit keeps censoring posts?
something to read over the weekend
Stories and poetry both fiction and non are on my blog now, and if you like my work, you can find more at www.melissamendelson.com.
You have the power...
If this really is permanent, then the only recourse for many, even long term, attached bloggers is to leave..because a vital cord of trust and respect for us as writers, as human beings has been broken. With each leaving, the site becomes duller and duller until all vibrancy drains away. Dave is a gifted and sharing artist; he entertains, inspires and encourages..this decision conspires of authority trampling unfairly and too heavily over creativity. Still holding a slim thread of hope for reversal - not a sign of weakness to correct a mistake - a strength of courage and intelligence. Please reconsider.
Dear Blogitstaff:
I'm sorry, but your explanation and "sorry about that, we'll miss .Dave" is not quite acceptable to many of us.
A more appropriate response to bloggers who "live" here would be to re-examine what led to your decision to ban him. Take another look at all the pros and cons. You could become a kind of appeals court, and entertain the possibility of overturning a hasty decision.
It seems the fair and correct course of action. Please think about what's best for the community. Thank you for your consideration.
About .Dave.
Okay, I know you've made the decision to permanently ban .Dave. I think it's a bad decision, but I don't guess you're going to change your mind just because I don't agree. But I want to tell you what .Dave. did for this community, and for me in particular, just in case it might help you understand why I, and so many others, are so very upset by this decision.
.Dave. showed up on Blogit four years ago and began promoting, not his own blogs, which would have been both understandable and expected, but my blogs, and other people's. He did what I didn't have time to do. He took my Blog Seeds and planted them, and encouraged other writers to plant them. And he started a blog to chronicle those posts that had been inspired by the seeds. And so many people found out about my seeds that way.
Many writers here were "discovered" by other bloggers simply because they wrote a seed-inspired post and were included in the list at the Potting Shed. I know I discovered a few that way. Many other writers were "discovered" and became popular because .Dave. took the time to comment on their posts, or to "remember" their posts in his "Blogit Gold Dust" or "A to Z of Bloggers."
In short, .Dave. came here and set out to contribute to the Community. Not just to earn money for himself and to have a forum to spout his own ideas publicly, but to promote those whose work he saw as useful, interesting, or unique. And his own work flourished because he struck a chord among other bloggers. Those who clicked on his blogs to "repay" a click or two found themselves hooked and kept clicking.
What was wonderful about .Dave. was that he didn't care if you clicked on him or not. He clicked my Blog Seeds blog every day for four years, and I don't think I've visited his blogs more than a handful of times in those four years. He knew my limitations, and supported me anyway.
All that to say, it's a shame that such a community-minded, inoffensive person has been ousted. I'm going to miss .Dave. And it's clear to me that many other bloggers will, too.
Dave did not break any rules.
We are all agreed on that. We have not been shown, and you will not show us, why you have accused him of breaking a rule that he did not break. It's no good saying he was spamming. He wasn't. That will not wash, and does not hold water, rather like my washing machine. Nothing was sent to anyone else's site. It was all on his own site. Repetition of the same blog? Which rule is that? So someone may have complained about these two unusual types of blog. Why did you take that complaint so seriously? Presumably, whatever that person says will carry the day, right or wrong, wouldn't you agree that's how it looks. There's someone out there of whom we should be afraid, very afraid. I know for a fact that there are other examples where people have been complained about for far better reason, and nothing has been do ne at all. And now, someone makes a complaint, even though no rule has been broken, and Dave is thrown out. Did you realise that Dave was the most community-minded person on this blog? So if you are sorry to throw him out, why not reverse the decision? You made the decision - not the complainer - you. So you can reverse it. Your hands aren't tied, are they? No-one bosses you about do they? You care about fairness to all, don't you, not just to one person's opinion (and their friends). If I complained and got ten others to make a similar complaint, even if it was unfounded, would you throw someone out in this same way? If that's all we need to do, then why don't we all start getting our little groups together and getting people we don't like thrown out. You can see that in that event, all the cliques would eliminate each other and there'd only be new writers left, Or maybe you only care about new writers, since they pay more, don't they? Maybe we are all expendable - or most of us, anyway, as long as your own personal favourites remain inviolable. (That's the view of many subscribers by the way).
Thursday, November 1, 2007
Please Provide Clarification.
Can you please explain why the Blogit staff interpreted items that .Dave. posted as containing spam? This is what everyone is asking--that you provide a better explanation of the rule than just a repost of or a link to the rule(s), against which we are all having a hard time seeing his infraction.
Offering a better explanation can only help us all out in the long run. If there is this broad a misunderstanding of your rule, then it's only fair to both you and your customers that you further explain it.
